wb1969

I know this has been discussed before on FT but I'm astounded at the difference in quality between BA and other airlines on mid-haul flights.

Last week I had to go to IST at very short notice on a one-way ticket.

BA wanted more than £500 in Y. A cheap short hop to AMS and I got a fare on TK for £140 on a widebody A330.

We got a full meal service, including unlimited alcoholic beverages, a reasonable IFE and a reclining seat.

Apart from saving nearly £300 after taking into account the positioning flight, I also avoided the bottle of water and packet of crisps which BA management seem to think is adequate sustenance for a 4 hour flight.

I understand this is the same offering on the even longer CAI route too.

How can BA possibly think this is good enough? It's shameful that our national airline considers this to be appropriate when they would be well aware what the competition offers.

TheChangingMan

And they've just added Malta. 5 hours + in Y in an A320.

krispy84

Did you mean the other Malta? i.e. Sharm El-Sheikh?

Strawb

Malta is nowhere near 5hrs from London

UKTraveller4Fun

The reason they think it is good enough is because people are paying the fares and booking. The planes leave full so BA are happy. The cost for them to have a more complex fleet does not make it worth it when as you point out they already charge more than competition from other airports.

The issue is BA are allowed such a monoploy over LHR and for whatever reason LHR is seen by so many as our inly airport that BA can charge almost anything for direct flights and get away with it in the current climate, the crazy thing is flights in the short term are inly going to get more expensive. For all the financial issues we maybe having as a country, it isn't stopping us getting on a plane ans going abroad!!

fdem

malta was always based on a 320 I agree shocking but flight time only just over 3 hours, SSH, Cairo and Amman at 6 plus hours truly shocking

Steve_ZA

Closer to half that time if French ATC bother to turn up.

UKTraveller4Fun

Don't shout it to loudly that Malta isnt to far from London, someone at BA may decide to reduce the TP earned lol!!

subject2load

And there it is. Neatly explained in just two sentences !

The fundamental philosophy (do not spend money or add creature comforts unless absolutely necessary) was largely initiated by Willie Walsh ………adopted obediently - and with relish - by Alex Cruz …….. and pretty much continues under current management.

lcylocal

I’d really like a return to the mid-haul
product. But in reality on many of these routes the competition is EasyJet, Ryanair, WizzAir and Jet2. Granted a little less so on Istanbul but certainly on many others.

I’m guessing the OP didn’t take a direct Turkish flight from London as it was probably similar in price to BA?

I think the only thing in favour of a mid-haul product is that is gives more consistency for passengers on connections through Heathrow to long haul.

wb1969

£350 I think

lost_in_translation

I imagine BA does fairly well on IST with CE, there is surely a gap for a CE type-product between TK's business class product on one side (more premium but also a lot more expensive) and the LCC type competition on the other. Note that TK actually flies a mix of widebodies and A320 series to LHR, not all widebodies. I have no inside knowledge here, but I've always assumed the reason TK flies A330s etc. to LHR is not for O&D traffic like BA, but because they are competing with QR / EK / EY for connecting traffic to Asia and it is a major disadvantage if you aren't able to offer passengers a journey that is lie flat all the way.

CAI is the headscratcher for me now, if I ever had to fly there I'm not sure who I would fly with and would even be tempted to connect in CDG or something to avoid the BA shorthaul product. I think BA basically gets away with it as MS is such a basket case, if there were stronger direct competition I suspect BA would have to go back to a 787 on the route or get squeezed between that and the LCCs.

RichieMc

KLM flies a 737 on this route. Half the TK MAD-IST flights are in narrow bodies. More than half the TK LHR-IST flights are also on A321s. An A330 on TK is great. But adding the extra hassle of a stop in AMS seems a lot of work doubles your flight time. And you seem to have gotten lucky with a low fare. It’s usually fantastically more expensive - more than double - to fly LHR-IST on TK vs BA. A long weekend end of April is €550 on TK vs £196 on BA, plus you get your BAEC benefits if applicable. It’s a 3 hour flight. Most 3, 4 and 5 hour flights in the US are on narrow bodies. People survive.

Duck1981

I think the current load factor of BA will give you the answer

Personally I am happy to connect via CDG or so when travelling myself without family (HBO only) or select other airlines when the price is better and the offering comparable (say in two weeks LHR to VIE £275 on OS vs £450 on BA) as I don't feel obliged to book BA because of my status.

Travelling to PMI early July with family I go for the nonstop BA CE as I have no intention to connect anywhere when flying with my baby (that's probably the answer to your question).

ModestPointsCollector

Agree - Absolutely diabolical offering. I flew to a wedding near Dalaman 4 years ago and it was virtually the same money to do the long part in proper business on TK changing at IST. BA was not entertained despite the lower travel time, I'm already dreading my 3 hour flight to Greece this week let alone a 5 hour somewhere on a budget narrowbody.